alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,

Petitioner 

v.

NICHOLE ASHLEY COLLINS,

 Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2441 Disciplinary Docket

No. 207 DB 2017

Attorney Registration No. 307141

(Dauphin County)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 12th day of March, 2018, upon consideration of the Verified 

Statement of Resignation, Nichole Ashley Collins is disbarred on consent from the Bar 

of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, see Pa.R.D.E. 215, and she shall comply with 

the provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217. Respondent shall pay costs to the Disciplinary Board 

pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 208(g).
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. William H. Walker, Respondent, *v.*George McAneny, as President of the Borough of Manhattan, Appellant.

*People ex rel. Walker*v. *Ahearn,*139 App. Div. 88, affirmed.

(Argued April 25, 1911;

decided May 9, 1911.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 17, 1910, which modified and affirmed as modified an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the re-instatement of the relator in the office of superintendent of public buildings and offices in the borough of Manhattan.

*Archibald R. Watson, Corporation Counsel (Clarence Farley*and *Elliot S. Benedict*of counsel), for appellant.

*Herbert C. Smyth, John W. Browne*and *Frederic C. Scofield*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Haight, Vann, Werner, Hiscock and Collin, JJ. Absent: Gray, J.
#### § 566.4 Definitions.

All terms defined in the Act and the rules and standards issued under its authority are used as defined therein. Specifically, *incomplete vehicle, intermediate manufacturer,* and *final-stage manufacturer* are used as defined in Part 568—Vehicles Manufactured in Two or More Stages.

(Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1392, 1397)

[37 FR 1364, Jan. 28, 1972]
CC Filed by Filing Services Canada Inc. 403-717-3898


SECOND AMENDING AGREEMENT




THIS AGREEMENT is made as of the 1st day of March, 2005.

BETWEEN:

BHP BILLITON WORLD EXPLORATION INC., a company incorporated under the laws of Canada, having an office at 2300 – 1111 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6E 4M3 




(referred to herein as “BBWEI”)

OF THE FIRST PART

AND:

ALMADEN MINERALS LTD., a company organized by amalgamation under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, having an office at Suite 1103 – 750 West Pender Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6C 2T8




(referred to herein as “AML”)

OF THE SECOND PART

WHEREAS:




A.

AML and BBWEI are parties to an agreement dated May 9, 2002 and amended January 20, 2005 (the “Agreement”); and




B.

AML and BBWEI have agreed to amend the Agreement as set out herein.




NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH that in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and undertakings hereinafter contained, the parties hereto have agreed and do hereby agree as follows:




1.

All capitalized terms as set out in this second amendment to the Agreement (the “Second Amending Agreement”) shall have the same meaning as ascribed to such terms in the Agreement.




2.

Subsection 1.1(s) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

 



 

2




“(s)

“Second Option” means an exclusive and irrevocable option to be granted by AML to BBWEI under the Joint Venture Agreement, pursuant to which BBWEI may increase its interest in a Project Area from an undivided fifty-one percent (51%) to an undivided seventy percent (70%) by incurring the lesser of: 




(i)

all Expenditures required to complete a Feasibility Study on the Project Area; or




(ii)

aggregate Expenditures of $25 million on the Project Area;”




3.

Section 4.2 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:




“4.2

The First Option in respect to a Project Area, shall be exercised upon BBWEI incurring an aggregate $750,000 in Expenditures on that specific Project Area on or before the seventh (7th) anniversary date of this Agreement.  A minimum Expenditure of $250,000 shall be incurred on each Project Area on or before the fifth (5th) anniversary date of this Agreement.”




4.

Except for the amendments as provided for in this Second Amending Agreement, which are hereby deemed to be merged with the Agreement, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




5.

This Second Amending Agreement may be signed by the parties in counterparts and may be delivered by facsimile, each of which when delivered will be deemed to be an original and all of which together will constitute one instrument.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.




BHP BILLITON DIAMONDS INC.







By:

/s/Ioannis Tsitos

Name:

Ioannis Tsitos

Title:

Manager, Business Development










ALMADEN MINERALS LTD.







By:

/s/ Morgan Poliquin

Name:

Morgan Poliquin

Title:

Director






Second Amendment (Almaden)
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 174 (Monday, September 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 51641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4393]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: October 10, 2007.
    Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health/NCRR/OR, 1 Democracy Plaza, 
6701 Democracy Blvd., 1078, Bethesda, MD 20892-4874. (Telephone 
Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Steven Birken, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institutes of Health, National Center for 
Research Resources, Office of Review, 6701 Democracy Blvd., 1 
Democracy Plaza, Room 1078, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0815, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#caa8a3b8a1afa4b98aa7aba3a6e4a4a3a2e4ada5bc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="92f0fbe0f9f7fce1d2fff3fbfebcfcfbfabcf5fde4">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical 
Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 30, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-4393 Filed 9-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[No. 1298.]

#### Russell et al. v. Craig.

1. ' Practice — Summons.

By section 33 of the code a summons in a civil action must be signed by the clerk and issued under the seal of the court, or it must be signed and issued by the attorney for the plaintiff. A summons not issued and signed either by the clerk or plaintiff’s attorney is no summons, and an acceptance of service of a purported summons which was signed by neither the clerk nor plaintiff’s attorney would be no acceptance of service of summons.

2. Practice — Entry of Appearance.

Entry of appearance by defendant to an action waives objections to summons or service thereof.

*Appeal from the County Court of Arapahoe County.*

Mr. T. E. Watters, for appellants.

Mr. E. I. Stirman, for appellee.

Thomson, P. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Suit by appellee against appellants on a promissory note. A paper in the form of a summons was attached to the complaint and was signed “E. I. Stirman.” A copy of the complaint and summons was delivered to the defendants on the 20th day of November, 1895, who indorsed upon the originals, and severally signed, an acceptance of service, a waiver of further service, and an entry of their appearance to the action. On the 80th day of November, 1895, the complaint and summons, together with the indorsement, -were filed in the county court. On the 10th day of December, 1895, the defendants moved the court to quash the service and the summons, because the summons was not in statutory form, and because it was not issued and signed by the clerk, or by any person purporting to be the plaintiff’s attorney. On the 11th day of January, 1896, the motion came on for hearing, *429and was overruled; and on the same day default was taken against the defendants, and final judgment rendered against them for the amount which the note showed to he due. The case is in this court on appeal from that judgment.

By section 33 of the code, a summons in a civil action must he signed by the clerk, and issued under the seal of the court, or it must be signed and issued by the attorney for the plaintiff. The paper in question was not issued under the seal of the court, it was not signed by the clerk, and it did not purport to be issued or signed by the attorney for the plaintiff. The only errors alleged are the overruling of the motion to quash, and the entry of final judgment. The paper purporting to be a summons was not a summons, and the acceptance of service of that paper was not the acceptance of service of a summons. But it is entirely immaterial what was done with it, or with the service. The defendants were in court by virtue of their written entry of appearance, independently of summons or service of summons. Civil Code, secs. 44, 379.

The assignment of errors raises no question upon the regularity of the default, provided the defendants were in court. As we have seen, they were in court, and the judgment, the entry of which is assigned for error, was the legal consequence of the default.

The judgment will be affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
Editorial Note on Part 393
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 393 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

§ 393.106 What are the general requirements for securing articles of cargo? ( a ) *Applicability.* The rules in this section are applicable to the transportation of all types of articles of cargo, except commodities in bulk that lack structure or fixed shape (*e.g.*, liquids, gases, grain, liquid concrete, sand, gravel, aggregates) and are transported in a tank, hopper, box, or similar device that forms part of the structure of a commercial motor vehicle. The rules in this section apply to the cargo types covered by the commodity-specific rules of § 393.116 through § 393.136. The commodity-specific rules take precedence over the general requirements of this section when additional requirements are given for a commodity listed in those sections.
( b ) *General.* Cargo must be firmly immobilized or secured on or within a vehicle by structures of adequate strength, dunnage or dunnage bags, shoring bars, tiedowns or a combination of these.
( c ) *Cargo placement and restraint.* ( 1 ) Articles of cargo that are likely to roll must be restrained by chocks, wedges, a cradle or other equivalent means to prevent rolling. The means of preventing rolling must not be capable of becoming unintentionally unfastened or loose while the vehicle is in transit.
( 2 ) Articles or cargo placed beside each other and secured by transverse tiedowns must either: ( i ) Be placed in direct contact with each other, or
( ii ) Be prevented from shifting towards each other while in transit.
( d ) *Aggregate working load limit for tiedowns.* The aggregate working load limit of tiedowns used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half times the weight of the article or group of articles. The aggregate working load limit is the sum of: ( 1 ) One-half the working load limit of each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle to an anchor point on an article of cargo;
( 2 ) One-half the working load limit of each tiedown that is attached to an anchor point on the vehicle, passes through, over, or around the article of cargo, and is then attached to an anchor point on the same side of the vehicle.
( 3 ) The working load limit for each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle, through, over, or around the article of cargo, and then attaches to another anchor point on the other side of the vehicle.
[67 FR 61225, Sept. 27, 2002, as amended at 68 FR 56208, Sept. 30, 2003; 71 FR 35833, June 22, 2006]
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, November 7, 1995 (141), Para 141.37 Providing for the Consideration of H. J. Res. 115]
[Page 1879]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.141.37  providing for the consideration of h. j. res. 115

  Mr. GOSS, by direction of the Committee on Rules, reported (Rept. No. 
104-326) the resolution (H. Res. 257) providing for the consideration of 
the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 115) making further continuing 
appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes.
  When said resolution and report were referred to the House Calendar 
and ordered printed.
```
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0626.html[7/21/2015 7:26:07 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jva-gbmv

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0626

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Todd Greninger

Address:

10584 Aetna ave ne

Monticello, 55362

General Comment

Leave my retirement to me
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of RegeneRx (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J.J. Finkelstein,
Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.




November 13, 2003                          /s/ J.J. Finkelstein
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Chief Executive and Financial Officer


                                       14
IV

House Calendar No. 45

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 179

[Report No. 107–113]

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 26, 2001

Ms. PRYCE of Ohio, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.

1 Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on

2 the legislative day of Wednesday, June 27, 2001, for the

3 Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the

4 rules relating to the following measures:

5 (1) The resolution (H. Res. 172) honoring John

6 J. Downing, Brian Fahey, and Harry Ford, who lost

7 their lives in the course of duty as firefighters.

8 (2) The bill (H.R. 2133) to establish a commis9 sion for the purpose of encouraging and providing
2

HRES 179 RH

1 for the commemoration of the 50th anniversary of

2 the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of

3 Education.

4 (3) The bill (S. 757) to designate the Federal

5 building and United States courthouse located at

6 504 West Hamilton Street in Allentown, Pennsyl7 vania, as the ‘‘Edward N. Cahn Federal Building

8 and United States Courthouse’’.

9 (4) The bill (H.R. 691) to extend the authoriza10 tion of funding for child passenger protection edu11 cation grants through fiscal year 2003.

House Calendar No. 45

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 179

[Report No. 107–113]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of motions to suspend

the rules.

JUNE 26, 2001

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
EXHIBIT 10.3

                           STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT

This is an agreement ("Agreement") between Scott Yancey ("Seller") and Stephen
Harrington ("Buyer") made this 28th day of February 2004, subject to the
following terms and conditions hereof.

WHEREAS:

A.    Seller owns 354,000 shares (the "Shares") of The Coffee Exchange, Inc., a
      company incorporated under the laws of the state of Delaware (the
      "Company"); and

B.    Seller wishes to sell the Shares of the Company to the Buyer provided the
      conditions herein below are satisfied.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1.    Purchases and Sale of Shares

      (a)   Seller hereby agrees to sell the Shares to the Buyer for $10,000
            (the "Consideration") and payable in full on the date of this
            Agreement.
      (b)   The closing of the transaction shall occur when this Agreement is
            executed by Seller and the Buyer. On the closing, Buyer shall
            deliver, or cause to be delivered, the Consideration to Seller.
      (c)   Seller shall deliver the Shares to the buyer free and clear of all
            liens, claims or encumbrances.

2.    Representations and Warranties

      (a)   As an inducement for Buyer to enter into this Agreement, Seller
            represents and warrants that:

            (i)   Seller has the lawful power and authority to enter into this
                  Agreement; and
            (ii)  Seller owns the Shares free and clear of all liens, claims or
                  encumbrances.

      (b)   As an inducement for Seller to enter into this Agreement, Buyer
            represents and warrants that Buyer has the lawful power and
            authority to enter into this Agreement.

3.    Binding Effect. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this
      Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit or the parties
      hereto, their heirs, legal representatives, successors and permitted
      assigns.

4.    Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
      accordance with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect
      to the conflict of laws principles thereof.

5.    Representation by Counsel. Both Buyer and Seller have not been represented
      by counsel.

In witness hereof the parties hereby affix their signatures.

SELLER                                          BUYER

By:   /s/  Scott Yancey                   By:   /s/  Stephen Harrington
      ----------------------                    ----------------------------
      Scott Yancey                              Stephen Harrington
- Page 1
- 781653_Page_2.pdf
Page 1
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1135.html[7/22/2015 2:30:00 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-1mmd

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1135

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

I am perfectly capable of managing my retirement plan. Everything the US government touches gets messed up

 so keep your paws out of my personal retirement business. 

While I'm at it, do us a favor and just quit legislating altogether until the country gets a chance to recover from

 your mistakes. The government's intrusion into the economy and peoples' lives has been going on since FDR

 and your brilliant ideas have ruined the outlook for generations to come. All you really care about is power and

 your cronies like George Soros anymore. Leave us alone! Concentrate on reversing or removing some of the

 nonsense you have already dumped on us like Ocommiecare.
Editorial Note on Part 40
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 73 FR 33329, June 12, 2008.

§ 40.247 What procedures does the BAT or STT follow after a screening test result? ( a ) If the test result is an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02, as the BAT or STT, you must do the following: ( 1 ) Sign and date Step 3 of the ATF; and
( 2 ) Transmit the result to the DER in a confidential manner, as provided in § 40.255 .
( b ) If the test result is an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or higher, as the BAT or STT, you must direct the employee to take a confirmation test. ( 1 ) If you are the BAT who will conduct the confirmation test, you must then conduct the test using the procedures beginning at § 40.251 .
( 2 ) If you are not the BAT who will conduct the confirmation test, direct the employee to take a confirmation test, sign and date Step 3 of the ATF, and give the employee Copy 2 of the ATF.
( 3 ) If the confirmation test will be performed at a different site from the screening test, you must take the following additional steps: ( i ) Advise the employee not to eat, drink, put anything (*e.g.,* cigarette, chewing gum) into his or her mouth, or belch;
( ii ) Tell the employee the reason for the waiting period required by § 40.251(a) (*i.e.,* to prevent an accumulation of mouth alcohol from leading to an artificially high reading);
( iii ) Explain that following your instructions concerning the waiting period is to the employee's benefit;
( iv ) Explain that the confirmation test will be conducted at the end of the waiting period, even if the instructions have not been followed;
( v ) Note on the “Remarks” line of the ATF that the waiting period instructions were provided;
( vi ) Instruct the person accompanying the employee to carry a copy of the ATF to the BAT who will perform the confirmation test; and
( vii ) Ensure that you or another BAT, STT, or employer representative observe the employee as he or she is transported to the confirmation testing site. You must direct the employee not to attempt to drive a motor vehicle to the confirmation testing site.
( c ) If the screening test is invalid, you must, as the BAT or STT, tell the employee the test is cancelled and note the problem on the “Remarks” line of the ATF. If practicable, repeat the testing process (see § 40.271).